#EPS files & Windows
9 messages in this thread
Dear Corel,
I printed an EPS file to a postscript printer and it looked great.
Then I imported the EPS to MicroSoft WORD for Windows, and all the
curves were Jaggy and UGLY. What gives.
What should I do to
1. Co-exist with Microsoft Word & Still use Corel Draw
2. Co-exist with True Type and mix Graphics w/True Type Fonts
Thank you,
Mark Karaman
Mark,
I need more info. When you printed the file from Corel directly to your
postscript printer all was well. Yes?
You then exported the file as .EPS and used the approriate function in word
to import the file.
When it printed from Word it looked terrible.
Assuming the file was correctly exported from DRAW is it possible something
went wrong in Word? I tried it here on my system and it worked fine.
> 2. What should I do to Co-exist with True Type and mix Graphics w/True
Type Fonts
Could you clarify this question for me ?
Paul
Thank you Paul, Donna and Rich.
I was not making myself clear. Thanks to you all I now understand why the
jaggies. Now here's a clarification to my next question.
I have many Corel images and had been pulling them as EPS into WordPerfect
and printing them to various postscript printers and to an HP Laserjet II
using Freedom-of-Press. I have seen how stunningly well done TrueType
fonts are, and how quickly they print… So what I want is a way to combine
Corel Graphics with TrueType text
in Microsoft Word documents. (You know, just like Corel's ad
says…"CorelDRAW & Microsoft [Word], the perfect partners) HOWEVER, I
just reminded myself why I used Encapsulated Postscript as the export
format for Corel. I took some SIMPLE graphics and tried importing them in
CGM and WMF format into W4W. CGM converted meaningful triangular pointy
corners of some of my graphic into meaningless smoothed corners while WMF
dropped 2/3 of the text that had been painstakingly positioned on the
graphic. Uugh.
QUESTION:
What is the best way to get CorelDRAW graphics printing to a Windows
printer using TrueType in Word and (maybe w/3.0 Corel) TrueType in the
Corel Graphic with the same quality that one would get from an EPS graphic
export?
PS: Using Windows to build Postscript Bit Maps of TrueType fonts doesn't
give you nearly the same quality of output as straight TrueType. Take a
look at anything underlined, one printed directly from Word onto an HP
LaserJet II and one printed to any Postscript printer with the Advanced
Windows Printer Driver option of True-Type to Postscript Bit-map.
Thanks for your help.
Mark,
>What is the best way to get CorelDRAW graphics printing to a Windows
>printer using TrueType in Word and (maybe w/3.0 Corel) TrueType in >the
Corel Graphic with the same quality that one would get from an >EPS graphic
export?
You can't really get the quality of the EPS format in any other format.
Usually CGM is my second choice for people after EPS. BTW, the results
that you mentioned with CGM and WFM, was that onscreen or when printed? I
have found on ocassion that my printout is different from the onscreen
version (especially with WMF since it uses a header to display onscreen,
similar to EPS files).
Donna
I was comparing printouts.
Since TrueType/Windows Compatible Printers might very well rule the world
soon, I wonder if Corel is thinking of coming up with a better export
format or working with vendors for direct support of Draw format. Maybe
Corel could learn from how many products support M. Designer.
So for now, there is no really good option in the non-postscript world for
exporting Corel?… especially if you have technical graphics mixed with
text and require AS HIGH A QUALITY graphic as can be accomplished on
Postscript printers.
Thanks. I hope Corel reads this last paragraph.
Mark,
>I wonder if Corel is thinking of coming up with a better export >format or
working with vendors for direct support of Draw format.
I'll pass the suggestion along.
>So for now, there is no really good option in the non-postscript >world
for exporting Corel?…
I've always felt that the export to CGM was a very good filter to use for
non-PS printers. What do you think of the CGM format? Have you had
problems with it? I've used it here and except for limitations that are
documented (e.g. can't contain bitmaps), have found it works very well.
I'm referring to the CGM filter that came with 2.01L.
The other point you made was "especially if you have technical graphics
mixed with text and require AS HIGH A QUALITY graphic as can be
accomplished on Postscript printers". It seems to me that one reason why
the DTP world is essentially broken into two parts (postscript vs
non-postscript) is because the quality that ps devices can output is
normally better than can be produced on a non-ps device. So, it seems to
me that it doesn't matter if you have a graphic that is equal in quality to
an EPS file, because if the dpi is the same, the graphic would still look
better on a PS printer than it would on a non-PS printer.
Looking forward to your further comments.
Donna
Donna,
You said:
>I've always felt that the export to CGM was a very good filter to use >for
non-PS printers. What do you think of the CGM format? Have you >had
problems with it?
I have MANY problems with CGM in how it changes significant aspects of the
drawing. To see some of what I mean, print "filigree" (on Business clip
art) in Postscript and through CGM format. The differences are striking.
The CGM graphic looks like its been melted in an oven.
There is a whole host of printers that are (and are going to be) purchased
strictly for their Windows (&TrueType) compatibility. HP is coming out
with a rock-and-roll TrueType printer that's 600dpi. If Corel and Windows
are really "perfect partners" then why can't you get what you see is what
you get export from Corel except through Postscript?
Also, TrueType is a language unto itself… has thought been given to 100%
TrueType rendering of graphic images? IE, have a TrueType Graphic export
that will work WYSIWYG on ALL Windows compatible printers.
==== ==== ======= == === ======= ========== ========
Thanks for listening. I hope this line of conversation gets through to the
"right people" at Corel. I feel strongly that the first graphic product
that gets to 100% Windows export compatibility (without requiring
Postscript) will get the lion's share of business.
… and have you noticed how few times Microsoft even MENTIONS Postscript
in their documentation. Microsoft has it in for Postscript. If one thinks
it will never happen because of installed base, look at what Word4Windows
is doing to diehard WordPerfect users (of which I was one).
Thanks again for listening,
Mark Karaman
Mark,
I may have a possible answer for your problem with the EPS file. I have
W4W 2.0A and today I imported an EPS file (from CD 2.01L) into W4W. When
it printed to my PS printer it looked like the bitmap header had printed
and not the actual EPS file.
I called MS Tech Support and this is what came of it. I had two frames
overlapping each other and what happened was W4W was unable to read the
frame that was on top and therefore just printed out the imageheader coz it
didn't know it was an EPS file. I got rid of my overlapping frames and
then the EPS file printed fine (BTW, I have no problem overlapping objects
in PM4.0).
As to your second issue about graphics and TT fonts coexisting, like Paul,
I'm not sure what the question is exactly. Maybe you can clear that up for
us.
Best regards,
Donna
Mark, If you're looking at it on your screen, in W4W, all you're seeing is
a low resolution bitmap of the EPS file. And if you print it from Word to a
non PS printer, that low resolution image (provided strictly for
positioning) is what will print. Rich